 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2]
|
You still havent read the szabo article I linked to you many times. Do that first. Iota i agree on.. spectre protocol is much better (aviv's project). But your wrong on so many levels its hard to know where to start with u other than telling you to read more. LOL, the Szabo view makes the erroneous assumption that PoW doesn't centralize more by the day resulting in something resembling a federated chain. So yea, his stupid economic view might work if everyone pretends a federated chain is "decentralized". The so called fundamentals are all lies pushed by people who know it but lie anyway, while the price is entirely a fraud as well. People like the Winklevoss have 200,000 coins they bought for next to nothing they can send to Coinbase and use as margin collateral to 10-50x the price overnight (the same thing that was done to create the artificially high Ethereum price on Poloniex). Do you really think it's a good idea for people to be able to rig markets by putting up collateral that not only has no real value due to not being a real commodity, but it's a completely imaginary asset that doesn't exist in the first place? That's an even bigger scam than the fraudulent Wall Street markets that existed before it. And it's not just bitcoin, they can create an infinite amount of coins and do this over and over. How is that not a scam? lol. These markets are all just fraud bubbles and the only type of assets that have real value are ones that exist in the real world you can take physical delivery of.  Physical delivery of what? Of the subsequent force which will take your precious metals away whenever the sovereign wills it? Believing you can actually hold, accumulate and defend precious metals against the sovereign is as naive as believing crypto has any real value to anyone else but the sovereign. In the absolute you are correct regarding value but, do you forget that real value can only be held long enough by the sovereign? While the sovereign holds true value you (by design) are only allowed to hold a shadow of value on the wall of the cave in which the sovereign allows you to exist. Even when you enlighten yourself to the extreme, you cannot escape the cave just because you are one of the very, very, very few that realized they live inside a cave. This last sentence would be true for anyone who becomes extremely enlightened at any point in history. Knowing this, why do you keep thinking that you can organize enough peers to escape the cave? There is just going to be another sovereign with another cave waiting for all of you and this one will know you to be a "radical" (or better, competition) and will make sure to squash you like a cockroach right away. At this point all of your complaining about useful idiots would be ultimately ironic since you will have become a great dead hero for all useful idiots. As has happened with many others before, dying as a great useful idiot and becoming an inspiration for generations of useful idiots is, sadly, the last stop on the path you walk. |
|
|
|
Good lord what is the fundamental reason for bch to be worth $50b, or even $5b? There are no bch futures. There is no bch for sale on major exchanges. There is no bch adoption or bch merchants. You cant buy lambos, hookers or blow with bch.
Usage and adoption are not why BTC is 300B either. Perhaps big brother has infinite cash to make the best tracking ever, the most irresistible ride ever. No publicity is bad publicity therefore no crypto hype is bad hype. How do we generate crypto hype? We buy it with infinite fiat. Why do we buy it with infinite fiat? Well, it costs nothing. Most importantly it is because having everyone cryptod is worth 1000 facebooks. And everyone will be cryptod soon... |
|
|
|
Don't listen to the fools thinking that any coin comes close to Bitcoin. There is no coin that is even close to solving the scalability problem.
Well duh, Lauda. It's just like Hal Finney says, bitcoin can only function as a settlement network. You would have people hoarding their life savings in bitcoins and then transferring say, $10k at a time or whatever to a 3rd party centralized service so that they can spend it (oxymoron since bitcoin itself is designed to centralize so both are centralized services in reality). The problem here is even if you make believe bitcoin is decentralized, you can do the EXACT SAME THING with gold and silver - transfer a small amount at a time to a 3rd party service to spend it, and gold and silver are far superior stores of value while bitcoin isn't a store of value at all. Metals also actually remove middle men when being spent in native coin format while there's no way possible to remove middlemen (transaction validators) from bitcoin. As you can see, there's no reason for bitcoin to even exist compared to gold and silver. It will never defeat metals as the base of Exter's pyramid. Claiming an imaginary object (bitcoin) can be a superior store of value is the most laughable statement in the entire history of mankind. Except that metals can be mined indefinitely. And if the price of them increased beyond a certain point people would just research ways to create them in a lab. Meanwhile Bitcoins will never go beyond a given amount. WRONG. Earth for all intents and purposes is a CLOSED ECOSYSTEM. The only difference is bitcoin is FLASH mined while it takes longer to corner all metals on the planet. And don't give me some sci fi bullshit story about how people are going to live on the moon 2 years from now and mine crap there. NOT HAPPENING. People said the same nonsense in the year 1950. Where's your flying car at? Only thing that's changed since then is larger televisions and a few electronic gimmicks like iphones. Even if you did mine in space, the cost of production will be several orders of magnitude higher making it pointless. You would mine on the fucking ocean floor first before doing that. And claiming bitcoin is finite isn't even true. Bitcoin has low scalability, thus small amounts of transactions for high fees. This means bitcoin has an INVERSE Schelling point. People are incentivized NOT to use bitcoin and instead use an altcoin in order to avoid usury fees. There is absolutely no fucking reason in this universe people are all forced to use one chain, NONE. Advocating people do so is only promoting USURY because it's possible for people to just make a new chain and avoid being extorted. This action eventually leads to the entire sector dying by dilution. Gold and silver are the exact opposite. They have no scaling problem, and they also have no altcoin problem. It's not possible for you to just invent a new noble metal in your basement like you can an altcoin, so the noble metals actually do have a functional Schelling point instead of bitcoin's inverse Schelling point. And no, there are not zillions of different metals that can take gold and silver's place. They belong to a special category of metals called "noble metals" (platinum and a few others as well), and due to the traits of this group of metals such as anti-corrosiveness and scarcity, there are no better alternatives. It takes two neutron stars to collide to make gold and silver. It takes an idiot in his basement to create an altcoin. What's in your safe cucks?Metals not hoarded will be taken by attrition or force. Metals hoarded will be taken by attrition or force. How exactly do you defend against this unless you can command more force or generate more attrition than them? Both are achieved by issuing fiat and you don't issue it, they do. Neither of you issue metals but their fiat takes it from you. No defense possible over a long enough period. It is their game. They won and your free will is just the totality of possible moves you can make in their game because you had lost before birth. When the cost benefit analysis of non-compliance outweighs the cost benefit analysis of compliance, that is when the goyim strike. It's getting near.  Lofty dreams based on a story that is a distortion of reality. You are a lot more alone than you realize and you may never realize it but that did not happen the way you wish it did and it will not happen as you wish it would. What will happen is the idea of that as the means to you and yours living and dying for their goals; again. You are a cell in a body in which they are the brain. We would all be worse off if you didn't perform your function, as whatever cell you are, out of delusion so why do you keep wasting time chasing a dream that can never bring you any upside in reality? Is it a fetish? |
|
|
|
Don't listen to the fools thinking that any coin comes close to Bitcoin. There is no coin that is even close to solving the scalability problem.
Well duh, Lauda. It's just like Hal Finney says, bitcoin can only function as a settlement network. ... As you can see, there's no reason for bitcoin to even exist compared to gold and silver. It will never defeat metals as the base of Exter's pyramid. Claiming an imaginary object (bitcoin) can be a superior store of value is the most laughable statement in the entire history of mankind. Regarding settlements: The impact of, say, 1 million transactions of 226 bytes (226.000.000 bytes) is different in 1990's, 2000's, 2010's, 2020's, 2030's, 2040's etc as hardware and networks scale. What is impossible in one decade, becomes feasible in the next, easy in the next decade, and trivial in the decade next to that. Blockchains will scale along with technology. Transactions will perhaps be only the lighter-load type of duty blockchains can perform, by even extending their capacities to hold a plethora of photo or video content. This is the reason why one can never say "never" - because hardware and network scaling is a given and it minimizes the impact of given data storage, data transmission and data processing requirements as time moves forward. On the other hand, we know for a fact that PMs can't transmit value over the Internet. That's not going to change, because it's their nature as solid objects. Bitcoin might not be the ultimate store of value, but both PMs and crypto compete against scam-fiat money, and this makes them both better options, suited for different cases. When full blown digitization of the economy takes place, and all fiat transactions become electronic, at that point the sale and purchasing of gold and silver will become a permissioned system. It is at that exact point when cryptocurrencies will become the most useful, as they will bypass the digital-fiat-controls barrier and work as parallel money. If you want to buy an ounce of metal without the establishment knowing it, you'll have to go through crypto. LOLDouble plus good propaganda, little brotherIn this sense, PMs+crypto will be complementary to each other, and even now they are both diversification against quickly devaluing* fiat scam. * In some countries, much more than in others - which is reflected in huge BTC premiums, gold-import/gold-purchase restrictions, etc. |
|
|
|
Don't listen to the fools thinking that any coin comes close to Bitcoin. There is no coin that is even close to solving the scalability problem.
Well duh, Lauda. It's just like Hal Finney says, bitcoin can only function as a settlement network. You would have people hoarding their life savings in bitcoins and then transferring say, $10k at a time or whatever to a 3rd party centralized service so that they can spend it (oxymoron since bitcoin itself is designed to centralize so both are centralized services in reality). The problem here is even if you make believe bitcoin is decentralized, you can do the EXACT SAME THING with gold and silver - transfer a small amount at a time to a 3rd party service to spend it, and gold and silver are far superior stores of value while bitcoin isn't a store of value at all. Metals also actually remove middle men when being spent in native coin format while there's no way possible to remove middlemen (transaction validators) from bitcoin. As you can see, there's no reason for bitcoin to even exist compared to gold and silver. It will never defeat metals as the base of Exter's pyramid. Claiming an imaginary object (bitcoin) can be a superior store of value is the most laughable statement in the entire history of mankind. Except that metals can be mined indefinitely. And if the price of them increased beyond a certain point people would just research ways to create them in a lab. Meanwhile Bitcoins will never go beyond a given amount. WRONG. Earth for all intents and purposes is a CLOSED ECOSYSTEM. The only difference is bitcoin is FLASH mined while it takes longer to corner all metals on the planet. And don't give me some sci fi bullshit story about how people are going to live on the moon 2 years from now and mine crap there. NOT HAPPENING. People said the same nonsense in the year 1950. Where's your flying car at? Only thing that's changed since then is larger televisions and a few electronic gimmicks like iphones. Even if you did mine in space, the cost of production will be several orders of magnitude higher making it pointless. You would mine on the fucking ocean floor first before doing that. And claiming bitcoin is finite isn't even true. Bitcoin has low scalability, thus small amounts of transactions for high fees. This means bitcoin has an INVERSE Schelling point. People are incentivized NOT to use bitcoin and instead use an altcoin in order to avoid usury fees. There is absolutely no fucking reason in this universe people are all forced to use one chain, NONE. Advocating people do so is only promoting USURY because it's possible for people to just make a new chain and avoid being extorted. This action eventually leads to the entire sector dying by dilution. Gold and silver are the exact opposite. They have no scaling problem, and they also have no altcoin problem. It's not possible for you to just invent a new noble metal in your basement like you can an altcoin, so the noble metals actually do have a functional Schelling point instead of bitcoin's inverse Schelling point. And no, there are not zillions of different metals that can take gold and silver's place. They belong to a special category of metals called "noble metals" (platinum and a few others as well), and due to the traits of this group of metals such as anti-corrosiveness and scarcity, there are no better alternatives. It takes two neutron stars to collide to make gold and silver. It takes an idiot in his basement to create an altcoin. What's in your safe cucks?Metals not hoarded will be taken by attrition or force. Metals hoarded will be taken by attrition or force. How exactly do you defend against this unless you can command more force or generate more attrition than them? Both are achieved by issuing fiat and you don't issue it, they do. Neither of you issue metals but their fiat takes it from you. No defense possible over a long enough period. It is their game. They won and your free will is just the totality of possible moves you can make in their game because you had lost before birth. |
|
|
|
Don't listen to the fools thinking that any coin comes close to Bitcoin. There is no coin that is even close to solving the scalability problem.
Well duh, Lauda. It's just like Hal Finney says, bitcoin can only function as a settlement network. You would have people hoarding their life savings in bitcoins and then transferring say, $10k at a time or whatever to a 3rd party centralized service so that they can spend it (oxymoron since bitcoin itself is designed to centralize so both are centralized services in reality). The problem here is even if you make believe bitcoin is decentralized, you can do the EXACT SAME THING with gold and silver - transfer a small amount at a time to a 3rd party service to spend it, and gold and silver are far superior stores of value while bitcoin isn't a store of value at all. Metals also actually remove middle men when being spent in native coin format while there's no way possible to remove middlemen (transaction validators) from bitcoin. Those transaction validators can also do things like pick and choose which transactions to block so it's not even a permissionless system! As you can see, there's no reason for bitcoin to even exist compared to gold and silver. It will never defeat metals as the base of Exter's pyramid. Claiming an imaginary object (bitcoin) can be a superior store of value is the most laughable statement in the entire history of mankind. 1 - bitcoin is "decentralized", "finite" and set to increase in fiat value by design to attract the herds for tracking purposes. Everyone is doing it and your talk is not as valuable to anyone as incredible fiat value from simply having BTC. Your talk has no value to the herds when compared to the incredible handouts from the "decentralized" bitcoin. 2 - It is a lot easier to believe one is anonymous when transacting BTC than it is with gold and silver. The logic here is the same as the one that leads people to be ok with having their location continuously sent to servers because they can pretend it isn't real. 3 - There is every reason for bitcoin to exist compared to gold and silver for the same reason that there is every reason for garbage to be manufactured in China vs. being quality products of American manufacturing. |
|
|
|
Here's another problem Marcus isn't going to want to deal with: The r0ach report 29: Bitcoin is similar to the double slit experiment in practice - It only works if you don't use ithttp://steemit.com/bitcoin/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-29-bitcoin-is-similar-to-the-double-slit-experiment-in-practice-it-only-works-if-you-don-t-use-itAt it's heart, bitcoin is nothing more than a variable number multisig. With current mining centralization, it's probably a 2 of 3 or 3 of 5 multisig. So the only question is how big of a multisig is needed for it to be considered "decentralized"?
The fact that bitcoin is nothing more than a multisig in practice also makes it kind of bogus because a multisig is obviously not an open entropy system. For it to be an open entropy system, instead of using 6 confs, you would probably need to use literally infinite confs. That's kind of how bitcoin is a con in practice, because given an infinite timeline, you can attempt to make the claim bitcoin is a decentralized, open entropy system, but if you actually try to use it on a finite timeline, it morphs into nothing more than a centralized multisig. People claim that's "probabilistic", but no, it's just a centralized multisig when a finite timeline is applied.
So there you go folks, the only way for bitcoin to properly function is by not using it because the act of a human using it applies a fixed timeline and makes it's mechanics fall apart.
(and anonymint is going to argue the confs can be rolled back at any time during the middle of this process making whatever number of confs pointless in the first place)
You are not incorrect. So what? |
|
|
|
|
